I do not disagree with this. I just disagree with the people in the thread that dismissed the game because it "only" has 70 votes when virtually every other indie game that has ever existed is also low on votes. We can argue till we're all blue in the face about whether the new games or indie games focus was a good idea, but that's not really the topic at hand. Hell, Alan Wake, a massively popular offer it turned out to be, only had 70 votes. The wishlist is not gospel.,It was obnoxiosuly hidden and hard to find for until the last couple months, and not everyone really cares to use it.

I didn't. :p

No, I dare say I missed that part of it completely( I think I was typing when you posted). If I was GOG, I might be tempted to give a polite BS response to get as far away as humanly possible. That is very risky business. Ignorant / stupid might be another take.

It's basically free DLC and yet different pricing:
*Credits can be exchanged for special items that you can use in your games or gift to anyone.
And 5 different prices depending the amount of credits + the naming rights.... yep the issue is growing bigger.
Bastion - 283 votes
Limbo - 118 votes
Super Meat Boy - 73 votes

With similar votes to Bastion for instance we have:
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Rogue Spear
The Settlers IV
Warhammer 40,000: Fire Warrior
3 Star Trek games
Colonization

So just keep in mind that almost all of the indie games in the wishlist are added in less than 2 months ;)
So yes there is demand for Indie games. Just a lot of the users don't know where the heck is the whishlist ;)

Hmm, you have a point. I'm not sure whether they'd be covered under fair use or not.
Also a good point. I imagine GOG would ask that the content be included in the game without outside dependence (even if it still needs to be unlocked by playing).
I'm not quite sure why that would be an issue... the things others have pointed out seem more likely (naming rights etc.).

Once Lucasarts get wind that a third party is profiting, you bet they'll take action and make life very difficult for everyone involved.

Most likely THE reason why GoG rejected it, so did steam.

Well, a DRM does not necessarily affect your ability to play the game.

Anyway, I wasn't saying that the upload feature was some sort of DRM, but the zero DRM stance that has been their leitmotiv since the very beginning implies that gogs can be played without any dependence on the internet. That simple feature (which you can totally ignore) could shake their stance a little bit. That would be a first that could spread to future games and the way I see it, they will have to reconsider their position regarding the dependency on the internet, and I don't know if they are willing to take that risk.

This.

Firstly, it's trademark that applies and secondly, if it's a reference then it likely falls under fair use.
That's why people use DRM because it does affect the ability of people that didn't pay to play the game. Now, you can argue about how well that works, but DRM is there to control who plays the game.

I don't think they infringe on copyrights if it's a parody or spoof, which in this case is what it seems to be.

In most parodies or spoofs they change the names slightly to make it clear that it it a spoof, like for instance calling the "Han Solo" character "Wan Loner", or something like that...

Well, GOG's loss. I loved UnEpic and recommend you check it out.

The humor may not work for everyone, but it was good enough for me. The demo is an honest introduction to the game. Try it out yourself.

I've never heard of Unepic and personally do not feel to loose anything there. However it should be available at least at GamersGate.

We have craptastic games like Master of Orion 3 and Empire Earth 3 on here.

Deal with it.

And they belong here, because they are old games. And for better or worse, at lest MoO 3 ist "culturally significant".